>>8645413 I'm not anything. I haven't worked for anything in my life. I'm a college student. Almost every essential service I live on is paid for by loans, grants, and my parents. I doubt you're any different.
>>8645050 It isn't super bulky, but definitely do not get the large unless you are absolutely putting a 17 inch laptop in it. It would be huge.
>>8644287 I would advise you to look for a place to check out the bags in person. The Isar Rucksack that you are looking at looks really nice with just the right amount of stuff in it, but it is very easy to make it look too full or too empty. I got the Twin Touch Isar instead as I found it didn't have this problem to the same extent. It holds a decent silhouette pretty easily.
>>8644287 Mine came in the mail three days ago. I get quite a few compliments on it daily.
"That's a cool backpack, where'd you get it?" "Woah is that a backpack? It's dope whatever it is." "I like your bag!"
People just like looking at it, it's also a decent conversation piece if someone brings it up. As long as you aren't autistic it's a pretty great bag to own. I wear a lot of black and white so I just copped the grey to have a neutral color that makes the bag stand out against the black or white. It's all preference though. It's a great bag OP hope you get it!
>>8644833 >>8645050 I haven't had a chance to handle it yet, but I've seen them around. Definitely not bulky, although maybe bulky for what they carry.
>>8645583 >>8645575 >>8645644 Which is what I'm wondering about, myself. I'm looking for a size upgrade to the Mission Workshop R2 I use now, something for a daypack + groceries, basically. It *looks* like it's large enough to fit a few bags, but they list it as being 17/22 liters, which is even smaller.
How much can you actually pack in? What's the twin touch material like?
The other thing I'm considering is a Mission Workshop R8, but as practical as that'd be I don't particularly want to go full one brand and a statement backpack would be nice (all my other backpacks are super practical).
>>8645130 Burn in a riot, motherfucker. You really shouldn't be on a fashion board if you're not "super interested in designers and stuff." How much money you do or do not have does not have anything to do with it.
>>8645944 I think if you got a huge MW bag with all the different attachments and stuff that's definitely a statement piece plus you get massive amounts of storage. It's definitely more money but I would say its worth it,
>>8646037 Well, two things. One, I've got smaller bags with more diverse vibes, but I almost always find myself leaving the apartment with my laptop, and I don't like (especially on a bike, which is usually) running something with weight like that without a three point strap or backpack straps.
Two, they don't really seem to do smaller bags. Everything seems sized for at least EDC with a laptop. Their loss, I think - most of their non-backpack designs look (from pictures) like they'd be much more suited, aesthetically and functionally, to smaller bags.
Like take pic related, the Ebro. Doesn't that seem like an awesome bag to fit, at most, an iPad Mini and a hardcover? But it's meant for a 15" laptop! Who wants all that banging against their hip?
It'd also, OTOH, make a very nice minimalist backpack if they threw backpack straps on the other side.
>>8646184 I mean it sounds like you've got some money to spare so if your willing to go all out why not just go with ACR? Basically everything your looking for good size, very interesting and functional, with a safe extremely well constructed 3 point strap.
I could fit a shoebox inside the back compartment of my Twin Touch. The material is good, it doesn't feel fragile or anything.
As for groceries, it's pretty good. I don't really do big trips though, I go every couple days and just buy a couple things.
It is absolutely perfect for daytrips though, I was out walking for shopping on holiday for about 6-8 hours per day and it held everything just fine. It's really easy to grab things from the back pocket too, you can just swing it around.
Biggest downside is that the Twin Touch's are softer and don't keep the shape as much (which actually seems like a pro for you) and it also loses the hidden stash pocket that a lot of people like about the standard models.
It's still sized for laptops. The smallest they do is one for 11"-13" models, which is doable if you don't mind carrying a pretty full-size messenger around even when you don't have a computer on you. Definitely a slightly more manageable scale if you just cannot do the backpacks.
>>8648716 nigga I see fat ugly herbs erryday wearin those godawful rafdidas runners, cheapest canvas ramones, that dip dye sweater and so on. why would I want to associate myself with such tasteless garbage...
What was the biggest problem you had? They definitely aren't perfect bags, but the idea of a functional, but design-oriented bag is surprisingly uncommon when it comes to the mid-price range, especially when you require laptop compatibility.
I guess I can appreciate what you mean, but IISE bags cost anywhere from $100 to $150 more and are still usually only half or three-quarters leather. It seems a little bit like an inapt comparison given that IISE is meant as a fashion/leather brand while C&C is more about accommodating computers in an unexpected silhouette. As for the material, I think more people would prefer a water-repellant polyester to cradle their laptops than just leather. I dunno, just seems apples to oranges.
I just find the fact that people are posing with c&c backpacks in a tech/active kind of situation irky as hell cause fuck you I'm not gonna jump around with my stiff ass macbook in the back without any protection bruh
>>8646431 Definitely hope to cop something from the 3RD ARM line eventually, assuming it passes a handle test, but they're nontrivially more, availability is an issue, and I'm kind of hopingly attached to the idea of having a daypack that's a bit less overtly, traditionally "this is a functional piece of gear."
Right now it's the R2 and two cousins of the 3RD ARM bags, the Sputnik and the Pogo. Pogo doesn't see as much use as I thought it would and I might ditch it, just run with the R2 and Sputnik.
>>8648564 Egh, sounds like it'd be smaller than I'm looking and the liter listing is accurate, but I'll still feel it out.
Something like 35-40 liters would be ideal. Also thinking about the Patagonia Black Hole, even though it's even more of a function piece than the MW. Cheaper and I just like it. I'd get it in black, I think, but the blue is gorgeous and clearer to see in a picture.
>>8648662 The one I posted as an illustration is leather; the ones in Eco Yarn are $135.
>>8648680 Literally the only thing worse than buying something because /fa/ told you to.
>>8650280 It's a sleek enough looking bag, and tough as you could possibly need it, but personally I really prefer having a single buckle on my bags. Just feels unnecessary, and what I enjoy most about clothes/gear/kit is a feeling of fluidity.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.